How to Kill Traffic Congestion, Economically Speaking: Part I
Traffic jam at Old City (JG Photo/Safir Makki).
Let us imagine a typical situation many of us face in Jabotabek. Every morning you ponder if you should drive your car to work or not. While taking a shower, you make a mental calculation weighing the benefits of driving (for example, comfort) versus the costs (gas, time, car depreciation, etc.). If the net is still higher than taking a taxi, bus, or the KRL train, you get behind the wheel.
You may feel good about yourself because you think you've done a proper marginal benefit and cost analysis. Alas, that is not the case. You’ve missed an important point — your decision makes other drivers' cost of driving increase.
As the road is now one car more crowded, their drive time is incrementally longer. Your cost-benefit analysis did not take into account the cost of having one more car, your car, on the road.
In Econ 101, this would be called a negative externality. It is more evident when we use resources with a price that is zero or artificially low, such as with roads. Multiply such (private) miscalculations by hundreds of thousands of Jabotabek car owners and we end with the all too familiar traffic jams we see every morning in the city.
Jakarta's traffic jams can be maddening. Out of your frustration, you may demand the construction more roads. After all, you think, it's simply a matter of the supply of roads not keep up with the demand.
Alas, this might be not feasible for two reasons. First, there are space limitations in already crowded Jakarta. Second, even if technology can overcome this constraint — tunnels or fly overs, for example — we'll soon run up against Duranton’s and Turner's fundamental law of traffic congestion.
That law says that the construction of more roads will lead to a proportionate increase in the average number of kilometers a car will have to spend on the road. Why? Because it increases the car usage of current residents' as well as the usage of those who had previously been beyond the reach of the road network. It also increased the amount of commercial driving and trucking done within a city.
The result: more roads, same traffic jams.
OK, how about more public transportation in Jakarta?
Public transportation will reduce traffic jams only if a substantial number of car owners shift to it. But, if I leave my car at home and take the bus, the road will be less congested and car travel will become more pleasant.
It’s a catch-22 that I know all too well. As a result of that realization, nobody gives up their car. After all, who wants to go to the trouble of taking the bus only to allow other car owners a more pleasant trip? Public transportation will just allow more non-car owners, previously outside of the public transportation network, to enter Jakarta.
Again, more public transportation may simply lead to the same traffic jams.
So, what’s the solution? For that, we’ll have to look to the late William Vickrey and his work on the road congestion problem. But that will have to wait for another blog posting.
Stay tuned.
Note: The author was inspired by "Triumph of a City", a book written
by Edward L. Glaeser, a an economics professor at the Harvard
University.
It boils down to the failure of a CBD concept- by forcing people to work in one area and live in another is the root cause of this problem. That, coupled with lack of foresight in building the necessary infrastructure for a city with a CBD concept. Now it's time to build office buildings in areas where people live and more apartment buildings in areas where they currently work. Then, connect buildings in Jakarta with solar-powered air-conditioned bridges that double as mall spaces. Finally, build high-rise parking infrastructure and create a walking promenade where there is the existing 'parking spaces' on the ground level in front of most buildings along Jl. Sudirman, breaking down barriers between building's so that this promenade takes you along Sudirman and no cars allowed, obviously. This will also create valuable new real estate for the current building owners - the challenge is making parking commercially viable: Jakarta must increase parking charges, thereby reducing cars used.
Great article, was glad to find someone writing more extensively and exploring possible solutions. I think capable public transport systems are important in alleviating traffic, but there is also the issue of not confining business districts so close together so that everyone will have to accumulate at the same point. A wide urban/city area should also be encouraged more so that people have a range of alternatives to set up businesses and go to work.
Tom Vanderbilt offers an interesting perspective on traffic congestion, safety, and psychology in his book "Traffic: Why we drive the way we do (and what it says about us)". Although it is focused primarily on traffic in the US, it offers some applicable lessons.
Glad to hear you point out a key rule in traffic management - that a government cannot simply pave its way out of a traffic problem. It works to a point, and Jakarta would benefit from a huge investment not only in new roads, but by modifying or simply providing adequate maintenance of its existing roads. The addition of an MRT system is a crucial part of a comprehensive public transportation network, and I look forward to reading about it future blog posts.
same side with saiberian.
and lthough public transport (Busway TransJakarta) is no longer comfortable but lot of people are keep using this. stuck in the crowded and stinky people in the Busway is better than stuck on the traffic (even with AC and good music) but going nowhere.
But, hei, I am waiting the part 2.
"After all, who wants to go to the trouble of taking the bus only to allow other car owners a more pleasant trip?"
I did not see the "other car owner pleasant trip" was included as a factor in weighing the cost and benefit of using public transport or car you mentioned before. Therefore the factor is for how long the public transport can still provide comfortable and reliable transport for former car owner.
Nevertheless, can't wait for the part 2
- Previous
- 1
- Next
Cafe Salemba started as a blog in 2005 by University of Indonesia economics students Arianto Patunru, Ari Perdana, Rizal Shidiq, Firman Witoelar and Sjamsu Rahardja. After continuing their work and study in different schools on different continents, they remain committed to making economics and the logic behind it fun to read. We are pleased to host the new Cafe Salemba.
Schweinsteiger, the Tragic Hero
The First and Biggest Indonesia's Online Shopping Festival
Watatita: Do Not Abandon Our Indonesian Heritage
Which Kind of Health Insurance Policies Are Necessary?
SSJ100 Accident: Reflections After a Week
Keep It NBA: Pacing Back to Relevance
Hijab, Misunderstood Symbol of Freedom
Great Sexpectations: The Danger of False Hope of a Budding Relationship
The Endless Effort of Women Survivors
Indonesian Cuisine Enthralls in the Midwest USA's Food Festival
@BilboBaggins: Must admit I am defensive. I am defending my and many other fellow hijab-ers' right not to be called an "oppressed, marginalized, 7:10pm | Hijab, Misunderstood Symbol of...
@OVOxo: Did I say anything near blaming women for not covering up? You've jumped into a wrong conclusion. My personal view on that matter is -unfo 6:01pm | Hijab, Misunderstood Symbol of...
I respect women regardless of what they wearing . It 's not about that in Muslims world, it's about covering the part of the body that should no 5:07pm | Hijab, Misunderstood Symbol of...
A very simplistic analysis of the subject and very defensive at that. In almost all islamic states women ARE forced to wear head covering so 2:59pm | Hijab, Misunderstood Symbol of...
Yeah but by wearing your hijab you are in a way stipulating that it's the women's responsibility to cover up as to not be harassed by us men. You
